The general gist? A minor update somewhere this year, but the real update won't come until 2014. In the meantime, we'll have to... "Resuming..." ...settle for CardDAV/CalDAV support, some additional HTML5 support, and fixes for Xbox Music metadata. We were promised regular updates and an early access program for enthusiasts - but Microsoft failed to deliver, once more. For all intents and purposes, thanks... "Resuming..." ...to the switch to the Windows NT kernel, the Windows Phone we're using today has very little additional functionality to offer over what we were using on WP7 release day. I've been a Windows Phone user since WP7 release day, but Microsoft has lost me.

Windows Phone, Windows 8, IE11, the failure of Windows Vista and then success of Windows 7,the recent reorg. at Microsoft, the failure of the Surface, to me all point to the same.

It seems no one has realized it by now, but at this point i'm almost convinced.

The closed software development model of MS is making the company slow and unable to compete.

When all the industry was like Microsoft, they had the edge, but now all their competitors base much of their platforms in open technologies, and are able to advance their product development cycles much, much faster.

Microsoft sticking to NIH and doing everything in-house is clearly holding them back. They were always like this, pushing products earlier and then getting them to mature state after many release cycles. But this doesn't work anymore in today's software ecosystem.

So, they are falling behind the rest of the industry by releasing products that seem promising but are still not quite there (making users unhappy), or by being forced to abandon technologies because they have no longer resources or money to allocate to them (making developers unhappy). It also doesn't help they want to focus into devices now (making hardware partners unhappy).

So, yeah, I believe their pride will be their doom if they don't change course and start playing nice with everyone else.

Windows Phone, Windows 8, IE11, the failure of Windows Vista and then success of Windows 7,the recent reorg. at Microsoft, the failure of the Surface, to me all point to the same.

Whoah, let's not go overboard. The Surface sold more than the Nexus 10, more than Chromebooks, and vaulted Microsoft to 7.5% of the tablet market earlier this year. They're continuing to iterate on the device and launching new models. They're including Outlook for Windows RT (I hear its all of Office) and writing Metro version of the Office apps.

You have a very peculiar definition of failure, given that Microsoft's own financials show that the Surface lifted Windows revenues beyond what would've been a flat quarter.

Windows 8 has sold north of 90 million copies using conservative estimates at this point, and is selling licenses at the same rate as Windows 7 did (which no one regards as a failure, even you)

IE10 has recently displaced IE9 in usage share and IE11 will likely do the same -- it is pushing their standards support forward in meaningful way. Not only that, they've actively removed compatibility APIs and become a more agile and forward facing browser. They even support WebGL, something I never thought they'd do in a million years.

It seems no one has realized it by now, but at this point i'm almost convinced.

The closed software development model of MS is making the company slow and unable to compete.

What!? Microsoft released 8.1 a year after Windows 8, VS2013 a year after VS2012, IE11 a year after IE10, etc.

The improvements in VS2013 are especially dramatic, and the entire WinRT platform as a whole is more fleshed out. How is this a slow company? The entire company is operating on a yearly release cadence.

When all the industry was like Microsoft, they had the edge, but now all their competitors base much of their platforms in open technologies, and are able to advance their product development cycles much, much faster.

Sigh, I do not know how you get away with such pointless garbage. Microsoft is within their rights to develop in house whatever technologies they feel like, and in fact, they are wildly successful and profitable because of it.

VS is a billion dollar business, EACH OFFICE PROGRAM is a billion dollar business, their Cloud is a billion dollar business, enterprise management software, etc. You name it. They are more successful today than they've been in a while.

Microsoft is printing money well into the end of this decade.

pushing products earlier and then getting them to mature state after many release cycles. But this doesn't work anymore in today's software ecosystem.

Compared to what? I'd like to see an example of a polished product out of the gate, because if you've done a day of engineering you'll know that to be patently false. Android was completely and utterly terrible on day one, so was iOS (didn't even have 3G, MMS, etc), so was (and still is) various Linux distributions which ship with tons of experimental garbage, so what the hell are you even going on about?

Software is a game of trade offs, did Microsoft make the right ones, was Windows 8 tragically doomed? Hell no. It had problems, but all software has problems, shipping schedules are never easy to beat, and if Microsoft could just throw money at the problem it'd be a solved issue.

These are interesting and complex engineering challenges and whether something is open or closed source is inconsequential. By the same token, one could argue that the infighting and lack of centralized leadership on many open source projects (lets not get into the slow standard setting processes of shit like HTML5) is as much as a detriment.

So, they are falling behind the rest of the industry by releasing products that seem promising but are still not quite there (making users unhappy)

I think you take Microsoft's struggles in the phone segment and use it to cast judgment on the whole of MS, which is intellectually dishonest.

or by being forced to abandon technologies because they have no longer resources or money to allocate to them (making developers unhappy). It also doesn't help they want to focus into devices now (making hardware partners unhappy).

Microsoft has more money than they know what to do with, and has the resources to do whatever they want. However money as I said before doesn't always solve the problem.

Microsoft had structural deficiencies and infighting which hampered innovation. Windows Phone and Windows divisions didn't talk for a long time. WinDiv was more or less kicking and screaming into helping the WP team for 8.

The reorg attempts to fix this.

So, yeah, I believe their pride will be their doom if they don't change course and start playing nice with everyone else.

You don't understand. It's not about sales or how well Microsoft is doing today.

My post was purely about raising a point on how long it's taking Microsoft to catch up, not that they aren't or that they are not doing well.

Let's agree on something:

-They have a successful business model, at least for now.
-They produce good quality products given enough time.

But also let's also agree that:

-They are not setting trends anymore.
-They are playing catch up in all the new technologies and markets.
-It takes them a long time to catch up.
-In the meantime, they are forced to release unpolished products, or lacking in features in respect to the competition.

Then, in retrospect, how long did it take..

-Apple to create an OS from scratch?
-Google to react to iOS?
-Google to create a standards compliant browser?
-Google to create a Desktop OS from scratch?
-Apple to create a new standards compliant C/C++/ObjC compiler? (llvm)
-Firefox to create a Phone OS.
-Sony to create Orbis OS for PS4

Then there's all the trends on virtualization, communication, streaming, etc. by using open technologies.

So the fact is that:

-Everyone is creating new products very quickly, thanks in great part to open technologies.
-Microsoft needs a long time to create new, quality products, with everything done inhouse, IE11 is finally getting there, Windows Phone and Windows 8 still have some way ahead,

And the question is: Can it survive, or at least stay relevant, in the long term with this strategy of creating everything 100% inhouse, given they are not setting trends anymore AND they are slow to catch up?

I wonder what it takes for you to realize that Microsoft is one of the companies the world would be better off without them.

Seriously, are you holding Microsoft shares or work for them?

As for the Surface? What the f--k are you smoking? Surface is one of the worst-selling tablets ever. Microsoft even had to cut orders before they even shipped Surface! [1] I don't know in what universe you live, but in this universe, Surface isn't selling at all, the same goes for Windows 8.

And, no, OEM sells don't really count because these are subsidized and people usually wipe Windows 8 immediately for Windows 7.